Aditya Kumar @ Shubham v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30797 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Aditya Kumar @ Shubham S/O- Ashok Kumar R/O Mohalla- Ram Sahai Lane, P.S.- Pirbahore, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Krishna Jha, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. J.N. Thakur, APP For the Informant :

Mr.Vijay Kumar Sinha Mr.Arvinda Kumar Srivastav Mr. S.K. Bhatnagar Mr. Krishna Murari Prasad Mr. Santosh Kumar Mr. Kumar Shivam Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 96 of BNS.

3. According to the allegation, the petitioner kidnapped the minor sister of the informant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The victim, in her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, did not support the prosecution case rather she made allegation in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30797 of 2025(6) dt.08-10-2025 2/2 her statement that her family members administered her poisonous substance that is why she went out from her house.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant assisted by the learned APP for the State has submitted that the victim is admittedly minor. Her date of birth, according to the admit card of the Bihar School Examination Board, is 14-05-2009. His further submission is that the victim filed an application that under threat and coercion inflicted by the petitioner's side, she rendered her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS. The petitioner committed rape upon the victim and her six-month pregnancy was terminated in compliance of the court.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner doesn't deserve the privileges for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T